{"id":294112,"date":"2023-03-20T05:30:00","date_gmt":"2023-03-20T12:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/calmatters.org\/?p=294112"},"modified":"2023-03-17T16:41:00","modified_gmt":"2023-03-17T16:41:00","slug":"court-ruling-gig-driver-union","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/calmatters.org\/_es\/economy\/2023\/03\/court-ruling-gig-driver-union\/","title":{"rendered":"El fallo de la corte abre la puerta al proyecto de ley de sindicalizaci\u00f3n de los conductores de conciertos, dice el sindicato"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t

En resumen<\/strong><\/p>\n\t\t\t\t\n\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t

Un fallo judicial la semana pasada confirm\u00f3 gran parte de una iniciativa de trabajadores aut\u00f3nomos de 2020, pero encontr\u00f3 que parte de la medida no era v\u00e1lida. La parte que el tribunal anul\u00f3 abre la puerta a una legislaci\u00f3n sobre sindicalizaci\u00f3n de conductores, seg\u00fan los defensores laborales que cuestionan la iniciativa.<\/p>\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\n\t\t\n

Lea este art\u00edculo en ingles<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

A recent court ruling that favored gig work companies may have a silver lining for pro-labor groups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Last Monday, a California appeals court ruled that Proposition 22 \u2014 a 2020 ballot measure that allowed Uber, Lyft, and other platforms to classify their workers as independent contractors rather than employees \u2014 was largely constitutional<\/a>, reversing much of a lower court ruling.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But the court found that one part of the proposition wasn\u2019t valid. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

It\u2019s a part that defined legislation on certain subjects, including unionization for app-based drivers, as amendments to the proposition. And amendments, the proposition declares, need to pass by a seven-eights majority vote of the Legislature. That super, super, super-duper majority<\/a> is a steep climb. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cIf the Legislature wanted to enact collective bargaining legislation today, it would be free to do so by a simple majority,\u201d said Stacey Leyton, an attorney with Altshuler Berzon, a law firm representing the drivers and Service Employees International Union in challenging the ballot measure. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Tia Orr, executive director of SEIU California, said that the drivers the union works with have \u201cmotivation and fire behind them\u201d with the possibility of being able to unite with their coworkers and bargain collectively. Orr said there are several options that the drivers are considering in the wake of the ruling, and pursuing legislation that would allow drivers to unionize \u201ccertainly is one of them.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But a lawyer representing the Protect App-Based Drivers and Services coalition, which includes Uber, Lyft, DoorDash and Instacart and is defending Prop. 22 in court, saw the Monday decision slightly differently. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

If the Legislature passed a new collective bargaining law for app-based drivers by less than a seven eights vote, it could be challenged in court \u201cand it would be up to a court to decide at that point if it is an amendment or not,\u201d said Kurt Oneto, an attorney with Nielsen Merksamer, who is representing the coalition. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

When reached for comment, Uber referred CalMatters to its statement<\/a> about driver independence from earlier in the week.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What exactly a union representing app-based drivers could negotiate over \u2014 if the rest of Prop. 22 stands \u2014 is also potentially up for debate. The initiative established minimum pay for the time between when a driver accepts a ride or delivery and when they complete it, for example. So could a union bargain over drivers\u2019 wages?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cTo the extent that Proposition 22 establishes minimums, a union could bargain to go above those minimums,\u201d said Leyton. Unions often negotiate wages that are above wages in minimum wage law, she said, \u201cso I would think that a collective bargaining law could authorize that.\u201d But, she said, there could be a legal battle over that. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

If lawmakers did pass a law allowing gig workers to unionize, that could tambi\u00e9n<\/em> face challenges in court, said Catherine Fisk, a law professor at UC Berkeley who filed a friend-of-the-court brief in support of the union and drivers challenging Prop. 22. For example, gig companies could argue that collective bargaining by workers who are not employees is price fixing that violates antitrust law, she said. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The case (probably) isn\u2019t over yet <\/h3>\n\n\n\n

The fight in the courts over Prop. 22 likely isn\u2019t over, though, and being in legal limbo impacts the political calculus around passing new laws.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If either side appeals the recent ruling, and the California Supreme Court decides to hear the case, it could still strike down Prop. 22 in its entirety or uphold the whole thing, effectively rendering Monday\u2019s ruling moot. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThat leads me to wonder whether there will be a serious push for legislation until that is resolved,\u201d said Fisk.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The chairperson of the state Senate labor committee, David Cortese<\/a>, doesn\u2019t plan to take action until the case is resolved. \u201cWhile we are disappointed by the court\u2019s ruling, we are optimistic that the rights of rideshare and delivery drivers will be vindicated by the California Supreme Court. It would be premature to move legislation as we await that determination,\u201d the Campbell Democrat said in a statement. \u201cRegardless of the outcome in court, we will not stand for wealthy corporations buying their way out of labor laws and we are committed to pursuing all options to ensure app-based workers are protected.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

His counterpart leading the Assembly labor committee, San Jose Democrat Ceniza Kalra<\/a>, said in a statement: \u201cThe fight to recognize gig workers as employees who deserve full protection under our labor laws is not over. As Chair of the Assembly Committee on Labor & Employment, I will continue to monitor the issue and explore all legislative options on the table.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The clearest path for drivers to have full rights and the ability to vote for their own union would be for Prop. 22 to be struck down in its entirety, said Nicole Moore, president of Rideshare Drivers United, an association of rideshare drivers. That\u2019s why \u201cit’s absolutely critical that this ruling not be allowed to stand,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\t\n\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\tm\u00e1s sobre econom\u00eda<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t<\/h2>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\"Bloqueado\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/figure>\n\t\t\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t

Bloqueado por los legisladores, Newsom cambia el plan de penalizaci\u00f3n de las ganancias petroleras a los reguladores<\/a><\/h3>\t\t\t\t\t\t

La administraci\u00f3n de Newsom anuncia que pasar\u00e1 por la Comisi\u00f3n de Energ\u00eda del estado en lugar de la Legislatura para aplicar una sanci\u00f3n a las ganancias extraordinarias de las refiner\u00edas de petr\u00f3leo.<\/p>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\tfoto de avatar<\/a>\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tby<\/span> Alexei Koseff<\/a><\/span>\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\"Mientras\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/figure>\n\t\t\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t

Mientras la ayuda de emergencia llega a los californianos inundados, \u00bfrecibir\u00e1n miles la ayuda que necesitan?<\/a><\/h3>\t\t\t\t\t\t

En ocasiones, California ha tomado medidas para ayudar a las v\u00edctimas de emergencias que est\u00e1n excluidas de la ayuda federal, como los trabajadores indocumentados y las empresas de cannabis. <\/p>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\tfoto de avatar<\/a>foto de avatar<\/a>foto de avatar<\/a>\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tby<\/span> Lauren Hepler<\/a><\/span>, Nicole Foy<\/a><\/span> and Wendy Fry<\/a><\/span>\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t